Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hello all, I borrowed a family member's car to attend a flat viewing. The viewing was at 17:00 on Thurs 17th June 2021(I have email to confirm this) so I was a little early as was the estate agent. I initially couldn't have been longer than 20-25 minutes before returning to the car and waiting, as the estate agent had to return to the office to obtain the correct key. I waited in the car for a approximtely 15 mins (after after the photos were taken) and then had the full viewing. The land is in a private, gated development. I received the attached PCN (Parking Charge Notice) today on Wed 23rd June 2021. It's hard to work out, but the 2 photos were taken at 16:59:08 and 16:59:40. I believe the photo was taken by someone on foot/Moped - Please help!   1 Date of the infringement Thursday 17th June 2021 [17:23]   2 Date on the NTK [this must have been received within 14 days from the 'offence' date] 19th June 2021   3 Date received Wednesday 23rd June 2021   4 Does the NTK mention schedule 4 of The Protections of Freedoms Act 2012? Yes   5 Is there any photographic evidence of the event? Yes   6 Have you appealed?  No   Have you had a response? not applicable   7 Who is the parking company? UKCPM   8. Where exactly Heritage Walk, Brentford, London, TW8 0RN   For either option, does it say which appeals body they operate under. ISA     UKCPM PCN.pdf
    • Shall I send their witness statement to you?    I'm very flattered by what you say, I've no legal experience at all, I researched the Internet and just spoke the truth.    You've made me feel very confident, thank you!    I've sent their Witness Statement and N244
    • Hi.   You need to put your pdf docs into a multi-page file please, or people will be here forever downloading - or give up. Our upload guide will help you.   I expect people will be along to advise later.   HB
    • This is submitted by My Father with my full permission     Diary of Sweden 2019 to date Last update 23/06/2021   Document list: Letter from Transport Styrelsen 290519 Letter to Transport Styrelsen 141220 Certificate from Kronofogden sent 150520 received 130221 Essex magistrates letter 120221 Documents received 130221 in Swedish Letter from Kronofogden sent 150520 received 130221 Letter from Kronofogden 150321 Letter with new hearing date 060421 Notes on appearing in court Swedish translation   Data between inverted commas is file name   15th May 2019 I was stopped at the border having arrived from Denmark. I was several hours behind other drivers in our convoy of articulated trucks You need to add what happened to you include tests and results where you were taken how long held what they did with truck including damage when they moved it. Did they speak to you in English at all times, was their English understandable, was any paperwork translated into an English hard copy, were you given option of having English translations When were you released including taking you licence away. Did they offer any assistance? Were you offered the assistance of a legal representative and legal aid.     The only part in the English Language is “Letter from Transport Styrelsen 290519” and that was about 5 lines on the second page saying I could send a statement to not lose my driving licence rights in Sweden All other paperwork sent to Chelmsford address is in Swedish only so no idea what the charges were and I was not at any stage offered the services of a translator. The “Essex magistrates letter of 120221” point 6 says I was offered the chance of a reply. That was only true if I could speak Swedish. I have tried running all the paperwork sent to me through a translator and it makes no sense whatever.   The statement they have sent to court Documents received 130221 in Swedish are wrong, I was not given the right to reply, just said I could make a statement about retaining my right to drive in Sweden. This was the only opportunity I had to defend myself. In the “Letter from Kronofogden sent 150520 received 130221” sent with the Essex Magistrates letters was dated 15/05/2020 is that now out of date for action, also that’s in English so there is no excuse for other documentation not to be in English Kronofogden states that no letters were returned to them, this is not true as my father sent at least two of them back as Not at this address as I have moved twice since this incident In the “Certificate from Kronofogden sent 150520 received 130221” it states I was Drunk driving, that is not true as I was breathalysed and that read completely clean, I was not given results of blood and urine tests. The Certificate does not split up the fines for the two offences, only the fine and the Sum of money to the Public Fund. On the European framework list that was sent to me in document "Essex magistrates letter 120221" and also the Certificate the only offence was 34. Smuggling of goods. Drunk driving was not one of the offences to be included on the list, therefore I should not have to pay the full amount and as the amounts only show total for fines and not each offence separately I should not have to pay total amount I should only pay the fine for the offence of smuggling. As they have not itemised fines then this should be dismissed. If not please ask for time to pay after looking at my financial statement.   11th May 2021 Attended magistrates court with my father who had much of the information and understanding of the correspondence. He was stopped at the entrance and refused entry, they then ushered me in straight up to wait outside the courtroom so I could not get the information from my Father. This was stated as Covid rules; the legal people arrived and just walked through with no questions asked. One Paralegal (who happened to be black) was stopped and refused entry even though she arrived with her client, there was a huge argument and the Court manager was requested by the paralegal. This is not the way to give justice to people. In the “Certificate from Kronofogden sent 150520 received 130221” it states I was Drunk driving, that is not true as I was breathalysed and that read completely clean, I was not given results of blood and urine tests. The Certificate does not split up the fines for the two offences, only the fine and the Sum of money to the Public Fund. On the European framework list that was sent to me in document "Essex magistrates letter 120221" and also the Certificate the only offence was 34. Smuggling of goods. Drunk driving was not one of the offences to be included on the list, therefore I should not have to pay the full amount and as the amounts only show total for fines and not each offence separately I should not have to pay total amount I should only pay the fine for the offence of smuggling. As they have not itemised fines then this should be dismissed. The Magistrate stated that they were not concerned with original case where the fine was given only this one, so judgement was given against me. They said the judgement would be sent to me   To present: I have up to present not received a copy of the judgement I have had three copies of further action sent to me, one at my old address and when I informed them again (as I did in court} they sent another two copies of the further action letter to me.    
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

  • Recommended Topics

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2176 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

When the Work Programme was introduced, and ever since, the Government said that it would be funded by the money it saved from future benefit spending.

 

I took the following figures from DWP's own statistics and placed them here to see whether anyone else can find where any expenditure on benefits has been saved, far less the cost of the Work Programme.

 

Total expenditure directed at working age

2010/11...................£51.17bn

2011/12...................£53.00bn

2012/13...................£54.98bn

2013/14...................£51.66bn

2014/15...................£51.91bn

This figure is projected to rise by almost another £5bn by 2020.

 

The proportion directed at Jobseeker's Allowance

2010/11...................£4.47bn

2011/12...................£4.93bn

2012/13...................£5.17bn

2013/14...................£4.34bn

2014/15...................£3.06bn

The increase in this benefit cost in 2011/12 to 2012/13 levels out any gain in the overall reduction shown for the 5 years to 2014/15.

 

The proportion directed at Employment & Support Allowance

2010/11...................£2.23bn

2011/12...................£3.55bn

2012/13...................£6.78bn

2013/14...................£10.44bn

2014/15...................£12.74bn

 

Total expenditure directed at pensioners

2010/11....................£100.34bn

2014/15....................£114.03bn

This figure is projected to rise to £126.50bn by 2020

 

We are told that 2 million people have been placed in work since 2010. If this is so why do the benefit spending figures show an increase? Surely we should be seeing a decrease.

Even if everyone on JSA (761,962 May figure) got a job tomorrow, what difference would it make if 2 million did not reduce the benefit spending figures?

 

Now, if no saving has been made, and not likely to be made, how is the WP to be paid for?

 

DWP estimates that the value of Work Programme contracts will be between £3bn and £5bn up to 2017. Even with the huge margin of error that they give themselves this is a 'conservative estimate', more likely to be at least double that figure.

 

Up to Sept 2013 a total of £1.047bn had already been paid to WP Providers.(Only figure I have managed to find so far).

 

No further evidence of the Work Programme's uselessness should be necessary than the Government's own verdict on it in 2013. The Autumn Statement of 2013 confirmed that the Government would be investing £700 millions over 4 years in the new Help to Work Schemes. This requires JSA claimants who are still unemployed after 2 years on the Work Programme to undergo further training and mandatory activities.

 

Claimants will be expected to be on a training scheme, Mandatory Work Activity or intensive work preparation within days of finishing on the Work Programme. Another £30 millions is allocated to that particular scheme.

 

I would suggest that the cuts so far, and the cuts yet to come, far from going towards reducing the deficit, is going straight into the pockets of the Work Programme Providers. Otherwise, if they expected to be paid from the money they saved the Government in benefit spending they would not get a penny.

 

So, not only are the unemployed made to suffer the indignities of those totally pointless, hopeless schemes inflicted on them, they also pay for the dubious privilege through sanctions and cuts.

 

It looks now like people who work, many who have never been on a Work Programme but get working tax credits, the sick and disabled, are going to have to foot the bill as well, because even if all JSA benefits were stopped now and given over they would not cover the cost.

 

When this dawns on the hoi polloi, stand well back.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...